measure, assessment, count.

I know you know.

But for reproducibility you have to make some definitions.

make a workshop (1h) with fiew experts of the quality you whant to benchmark.

Ask them to write down the most essetial features on post-it (10 min)

Ask the to stik them on 5 Areas maybe cabinetdoors, windows or white baoards (2min)

Ask them to organice (15min) The areas still have NO name, there is no rule. Everybody is allowed to take every post-it to every area, one by one, for and back :-)

Now you can open the discussion about the titles for the areas. (15min) They may become the name of the topic.

Maybee trye to finalise the order of the system in consence with the experts and remove doubbled ones. (10min)

Now ask them to make ratings of the Subject you whant to benchmark for every topic means area with post-it's. (4min)

Ask them for an overall rating (of the Subject) (1min)

Define the essential characteristiks of every topic / aea

calculate the ratings of the topics

calculate the rating of the subject

find the coefficients of determination of the topics

try to define the rating of the characteristics in each topic /area

By results define further procedures.

After such a 'tiny' procedure and some ingenious analyses a typist was able to "count" the design inside a Robot cabinet by an predefined and explained counting List (digital:)!

But the most worthwhile effect has been that the designers and engineeres themselve can read which features have which impact to the rating for overall use.

The certeinty with the experts rating was much higher than 0.9 in every topic. :-D Success!

In your case I expect difficulties because as i understand the digital ability would even be a measure how students can access the universitys cloud. Doesn't this carry weight to the digital ressources? In the method, the separation of the subjects could becomes one of the areas, windows, cabinetdoors ....

Thanks very much, Stefan. As you so rightly point out, the challenge lies in creating appropriate definitions. That's why I was curious to discover whether any institution had undertaken either/both of these assessments.

If our university wants to "benchmark" a research unit against an external one, it begs the question as to whether the external unit is necessarily exhibiting best practice, i.e. would be an appropriate benchmark; alternatively, they may just have more of everything because they have more funding.

It may be more a question of discovering (creating?) a framework to address this perhaps?

Yes, abstractions are mostly different and also the clustering. This was the reason I suggest to develope your own kind of neutral "inertial System". (physicist;-) But of course take what there is, and you need not invent again!

I got the Methods once form Univ.-Prof. Dr. Horst Wildeman from the Technische Universität München. He designed/arranged the Productclinik as a toolkit of many methods like chery picking, best practice, and data warenhouse.... (AAA)

I would be astonished if he never did benchmark like you intend to do.

You may have a look: https://www.tcw.de/

Following Resources may be useful:

Best Wishes

It does’nt answer your question directly but the Altmetric Score of an institution or department can now be calculated using Altmetric Explorer. The score would crudely indicate the social media ePower of the institution or particular department. Some crude comparisons could be made. Many have not engaged with Altmetrics but i expect it will eventually be used in the REF framework. Already Altmetrics Show Impact. One day a researcher’s funding, or even length of contract might be dependent on their Altmetric score departmental or lifetime!

Thanks, Christopher. Excellent overview of altmetric scores. As you say, still not quite what I am looking for. It may be that DTI (digital transformation for industry) is the place where I need to start. A journey of exploration :-)